PSC cannot abdicate responsibility to Cabinet Secretaries

Following the promulgation of the Constitution in 2010, the appointment of Cabinet Secretaries, formerly referred to as Ministers was de-linked from the Legislature as was the case previously.

Under the old Constitution, ministers were appointed at the pleasure of the President from among the elected Members of Parliament who, to a greater extent struck a chord with the man at the helm and were obsequious to a fault.

Since such individuals owed their allegiance to the appointing authority, they became lousy in the execution of their mandates, an issue that necessitated drafters of the 2010 Constitution to demand that in order to enhance the performance of ministers, free from the encumbrances of party politics; they had to be appointed outside Parliament.

As a concept, this was noble but its implementation has exposed the flaws, for it appears to have achieved the exact opposite. Cabinet Secretaries have not acquitted themselves well and more questions surround their competency. Drawing examples from how the Ministries of Lands, Labour, Security, Agriculture and Education have so far acquitted themselves, there is little doubt that they are extensions of the Executive and act at its behest.

It is with this knowledge that the latest move by the Public Service Commission to give outright control of the Civil Service to Cabinet Secretaries in running their respective ministries raises concern. Concerns raised by civil servants and their trade unions cannot be swept under the carpet on the pretext that people often resist change, even if it is for their own good as the PSC chairperson Margaret Kobia would want Kenyans to believe.

Giving sweeping powers to Cabinet Secretaries to hire, fire, promote, appraise and discipline could be counter-productive in the long-term. In any case, it is doubtful that they have the capacity to do so.

The Government is in the process of cutting down on the wage bill by making the Civil Service leaner and more productive but is at pains to do so, especially given that at least 60,000 workers stand to lose their jobs if the plan is carried through.

There is the danger that passing the responsibility of running ministries to Cabinet Secretaries could help it achieve this because, if done sporadically, layoffs may not be noticed by the public.

Politicising the public service is a big mistake, it must remain professional. Allowing individual's free rein of the public service will negatively impact on an institution that is already not giving its best.

What will the Directorate of Public Service and the Human Resource departments that have hitherto been attending to staff matters do when the CS's take over?

Will there still be job security for workers? The Public Service Commission was established by the Constitution and its functions and powers are clear. Among them, it is to establish and abolish offices in the public service, appoint persons to hold or act in those offices and to confirm appointments.

Additionally, it exercises disciplinary control over persons holding office, develops human resource in the public service and ensures the service is efficient and effective. These are the core constitutional functions of the Public Service Commission.

Why does the PSC then want to cede its responsibilities to the Cabinet Secretaries who are political appointees and are not legally allowed to run the functions of the PSC? The Public Service Commission should reconsider its move for; in any case, it is unconstitutional.